Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Midsize Sedans Comparison Thread
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I wouldn't turn down ESC, but I wouldn't not buy a car because it didn't have it. To those people who think it's the answer to all ills. I think I feel much safer on the road knowing that you have it on your car.
ESC is not going to keep the car from swerving too rapidly to avoid an accident or obstacle without giving up some of the change of direction as the electonics use a brake on a wheel to keep the car from swerving more rapidly. If it keeps the car from having the rear continue to rotate more than the driver intended, it's going to let the car make less of a curve than the driver requested. That means the car will hit whatever the driver was trying to avoid.
If on the other hand your value is in the driver maintaining a more controlable vehicle, the ESC can keep the car from spinning possibly. So a driver who just did something beyond the ability of the 4 contact patches to control may be rescued from their failings.
The actual scene depends upon the scenario you wish to set up. But the laws of physics have not been repealed. It's like 4-wheel drive cars being "safe" in winter. I keep seeing them in the ditch every time we have a special snow. The drivers think their car's ability in deep snow at low speed will keep them on a crowned road with ice/sleet/packed snow on it. It doesn't. They think 4-wheel drive means they have extra stopping power over an "ordinary" car. REmember the 4 contact patches only allow so much friction.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I can't tell you how many fwd cars I see in ditchs and spinouts in snow bound conditions. More so than 4wd vehicles. That is a "factoid", not a fact.
Does this change brake pressure at individual wheels, or just each axle?
Does this operate all the time, or just in evasive/panic maneuvers (like VSA?)?
Just curious, if anyone knows.
Wikipedia
Basically, it can optimize the braking force on each tire individually by means of an electronic control instead of a proportioning valve for front to rear bias, and ABS optimizes the side to side braking. I would think you would have to hit a threshold where you are losing traction for the system to kick in.
There are also systems that combine brake assist, which is stores additional brake pressure so when you slam on the brakes, it will release that pressure and slam on the brakes even harder. This is different and in addition to normal power brakes.
There are many, many more FWD cars on the road than 4-wheel drive cars on the road. The ratio of 4-wheel drives who overrun their car's ability is high compared to the FWDs who end up on the side.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
and this did happen to me about a year ago - and accelerating high speed swerve onto the road shoulder to avoid somebody cutting in front of me on the highway. Don't think (I will never KNOW) that any ESC system would have allowed me to avoid what turned out to be a 5 car accident...
I'm probably going to test-drive a '08 Altima when my wife and I start looking for her next car (probably early next year). Hopefully, the suspension has improved. I can't tell from pics just how "spartan" the interior is, but it HAS to be an improvement over the first-gen.
Check it out on leftlanenews.com
Photos courtesy of The Hollywood Extra
I'm guessing not too many, considering the G is RWD, more performance-oriented, with a luxury nameplate, unlike the FWD, mass-market-oriented, less expensive Altima. Different consumer groups, AFAIC.
This is very true.
ESC makes no decisions of its own it reacts to the original decision made by the driver, i.e. to go in one direction, and assists in not doing something to the contrary, i.e. spinning out of control or drifting offline.
And yes most times the 'car' is making a good decision, and then there are other times maybe not.
Don't have the slightest idea what assists in not doing something to the contrary, even means but if you are telling me that ESC has some way to determine driver intentions, it really does need be switched off ASAP!
So I think it's more that Hondas tend to fit the profile of C/D's "ideal" car better than other makes, vs. a bias towards Hondas because they're Hondas.
Honda earns their respect from many, many outlets other than Car and Driver. And for good reasons.
Say you want the car to quickly dart around a deer that suddenly ran out in front of you. If the car loses traction and begins to fishtail, it will stop obeying your steering commands. ESC intervenes to restore traction and thus stop the fishtailing, allowing you to avoid the obstacle without leaving the road.
"Electronic Nanny" is not an appropriate term for a function like ESC that you can simply switch off. If you feel like nothing will ever suddenly shoot in front of you, just switch it off.
But if someone can win a lawsuit from McDonald's for serving their coffee too hot then ESC lawsuits are bound to happen.
90% of the magazine testers are bias toward Honda. And 90% of Honda owner's are bias toward Honda too. Why do you suppose that is? A "test drive" is not an adequate means of evaluating a car. The people who do the testing for magazines are experienced, and know what to look for. They actually test the car, not just drive it around the block. The Accord's suspension, is what wins the tester's hearts.
That and about a dozen other things. Not bad for a 5 year old design.
But it's time for an Accord facelift.
lifesaversheet metal saver, had I been doing 55 it wouldn't have mattered worth a darn.I'll agree with this assessment. I've been a C&D subscriber for years, and I feel they've always been biased toward the driving experience (power, handling), rather than just the vehicles themselves. Yes, they've picked Hondas frequently in the past, but you could say that about BMW as well.
You may not like their methods, and that's fine. That's why you read C&D (and the other car mags), auto websites (including Edmunds *shameless plug*), and get all the information out there. Then, you drive all the offerings yourself and pick the vehicle that suits YOU. I don't know of anyone that's bought a car based solely on magazine reviews, and sure wouldn't want to meet one either.
Given that all switchable systems I know of automatically will 'reset' itself, electronic nanny is certainly appropriate, it would actually be better that these systems be user adjustable in terms of intervention levels.
In terms of your deer example there should be two things that happen to the poor animal: 1) you hit it because your car stopped responding to your sudden inputs and 2) you did manage to not fishtail or spin because of what the car wouldn't let you do.
Have you seen CD reviews/opinions on the Honda Civic (redesign as well as the older one)?
CD has been knocking domestics because of the kind of cars they put out for a long time, as soon as a good one came out (Fusion) they rated it pretty high. Similarly for a Chrysler 300; they love it....
right on - and yep Ford seems to be doing a better job making more competitive products than GM/Chrysler. BUT all of them could only wish have the Sonata/Azera in terms of engineering acumen and value. The Koreans obviously with Toyota/Honda/Nissan firmly in their sights - and not without some justification.
Don't lump GM into the same pit as Ford. Ford's problems aren't from the media bro.
The media didn't create the Ford problems. Maybe aggrivated them some, but Ford obviously can't match the Japanese in most of the aspects of car producing.
Which publications did you see that showed Ford/GM as unreliable cars? I have never seen any reliability comments made by CD/MT/RT etc; they usually only comment on problems if they have them on their long termers.
Secondly, what great cars are you talking about that have come out from Ford/GM in the recent past? Taurus? Focus? Malibu? Impala? Cavalier? Sunfire? Ion? IMO the only good car to have come out from these two manufacturers recently is the Fusion, and wonder of wonders, its doing well, and has been rated high by the same media you complain about. Face it, if it is good car, it will sell. Look at the Sonata, from an invisible car on the midsize scene, it is a serious contender and will probably sell 250k copies this year itself. That's not because of the media, simply because its a good car at a great price with a great warranty. Keep watching, Hyundai will sell more and more cars with their new models, like the Sante Fe, Elantra and even the Accent, because they are raising the bar for themselves and in turn offering real alternatives to the mainstays. What's keeping Ford/GM from doing the same?
If the media image was keeping buyers away from Ford/GM cars how do you explain the success of the Mustang?
A question for you; why is it that Ford never sells is best cars in the US? Have you driven the European Focus or the Mondeo? Have you seen the levels of fit and finish in those cars? For God's sake, even the cheapo Asian Fiesta has far better fit/finish than anything they sell here other than the FMZ triplets. Similarly for GM, they make some real nice cars in Eurpoe but just don't get them here (excepting the Aura, which I am sure will be a hit).
Fact is, both Ford/GM concentrated wholly on the SUV/truck segment and got totally left behind; they now realize this and that is the reason you see cars like Fusion/Aura being launched.
Today Ford has re-stated its losses and they will be greater than expected. This is the same economy where manufacturers like Huyndai are making hay???? Does that look like Media bais to you?
And this was because people were willing to pay prices for these vehicles that generated a lot of profit.
The original Taurus was considered to be a very good car at the time. Ford did originally bring the european mondeo here as the contour, but it did not sell.
Mind explaining the last-place finish of the Honda Element in a comparison with two American cars (Chevy and Chrysler) and a Scion? (Feb 2006)
They cite that Honda "colored outside the lines and right off the page" with their design of the Element, mentioning awkward driving position, roaring noise, and a slow acceleration time, among others.
Not exactly a glowing review.
you have to go back to the reviews of when it first hit the market.
Also, The descriptions are as subjective as they come. For instance, the Chevy Impala engine is described: "delivers responsive performance but sounds coarse..." What the hell does that mean? Is that objective? The Mazda6 review is more blatant. It says "the engines aren't as punchy or refined as those in the Accord or the Camry." I can talk or dispute numbers, but punchy? What does that mean? The V6 Mazda does 0-60 in 6.8, the 6cylHonda Hybrid does it 6.9. That tenth of a second makes it more punchy I guess. I personally test drove a new Camry 4cyl and it sounded like the 4 cylinder engine was sitting next to me in the driver's seat. But I guess I'm just not smart enough to realize how "refined" it sounded. It also couldn't get out of its own way trying to merge. I guess that makes it punchy.
I also don't understand how a mazda 6 could do 53.5 mph in the accident avoidance maneuver and the v6 hybrid honda accord max out at 52 mph and they both get the same "much better than average" bubble in the summary. The Acura TSX can only do 52.5 mph and it is considered a premium sedan and lo and behold it gets "much better than average" in the PREMIUM SEDAN CATEGORY!" How are 52 and 53.5 both "much better than average?" especially when both honda products are over $30,000! I don't get it.
Consumer Reports is biased. :mad:
What you're saying is exactly backwards from reality, and not even close to the way ESC works. It only kicks in after traction is already lost. When traction is lost, your steering quits working, so what do you have to lose? The only time you should notice the ESC is during a dire emergency, and those are always stunningly sudden and totally unexpected.
I saw a demo film that showed a car going through an obstacle course at way too high a speed. Without ESC, the car wiped out the traffic cones. With ESC, the car went between the cones just fine. There is no downside to ESC unless you like to auto cross. Then, you just turn it off.
Honda and Toyota have been re-designing their cars every 4-5 years for a while now, and they are always reliable. The VW, on the other hand, has no such reputation, and the reliability cannot be predicted. What's so hard to understand about that.
If you were to ride in my V6 Accord for a week, then ride in an Impala for a week, you would know why the Accord is considered more refined.
I'm biased too. I had to drive an 06 Impala for a week, and it does not hold a candle to my 03 Accord.
Toyota and HOnda reliability has, and always will be (at least thus far) very predictable. Toyota and Honda continually and consistently put out highly reliable well-built vehicles that are dependable. Just because they redesign the car, doesn't mean that the reliablity is unpredictable. They have over 20 years of automotive prowess under their belts. 20 years of stellar records and reliablity. Many redesigns in that time, without any failures. (speaking of Accord, Civic, Camry, Corolla only) Those are the models that have been around those 20 years. My 03 Accord's engine is so refined, that you can barely hear it even at 6,000+ RPM's.
It was sooooooo BAD, that I just won't consider American again, no matter what the media does or says.
I base my future decisions based on prior experience.
That's not very wise. If you shut out manufacturers because of 1 bad experience, you will eventually be walking. Cars change. Over the years, car quality in a given badge goes up, goes down, and sometimes even stays constant for a short while. VW and Audi have remained constant and fairly unreliable. Porsche has gone way up. Mercedes is improving slightly from its recent doldrums. GM is going up, as is Ford, but thay have a way to go. Hyundai has shot way up. Toyota has gone down slightly in the past 3-4 years. Honda has remianed fairly constant in the past 10 years. Nissan is improving slightly. And so on.
That is exactly the attitude that makes it an (unfair) uphill battle for the domestics to win back current Honda and Toyota customers.
How can you say no failures? The 07 Camry has a well known transmission problem. What about the engine sludge problem in previous Camrys that Toyota tried to ignore? What about the Honda/Acura transmissions that locked up at highway speeds? You're talking about cars only but what about the recalls on the Odyssey and the CR-V fires?
Get your head out of the sand and start looking at facts. It's not 1990 any more. Honda and Toyota are not infallible and their cars are not necessarily more reliable than others. Reliability and quality of the *new* Ford cars (Fusion/500/Edge/etc) is at least as good as, if not better, than Honda and Toyota.
OTOH, when they make subjective comments using words that have a clear meaning to me, then I can understand what they are trying to say and verify it for myself, if I wish to. Some examples would be when they say the back seat is cramped or too low, driving position is awkward or uncomfortable for some (with further description of what the actual problem is).
I've often heard things like a "refined" engine meaning that it is likely smooth all the way through the rev-range, as opposed to a coarse GM 3800 V-6/3500 V-6 etc which is gravelly sounding, although adequate in power.
"Refined" controls usually mean something similar - well-developed, feels like the control actually cost something (turn a fan speed knob on an Accord then turn it on a Stratus and see the difference in a "refined" interior control; the Stratus feels like it could break in your hand).
It would make more sense for reviewers to just say "the Stratus feels like it could break in your hand, wouldn't it?"
Aside from the fact that this first sentence just doesn't make any sense (how exactly can one say "always will be" and "thus far" together in the same sentence), it's simply not accurate.
First year problems have run rampant in recent toyota offerings:
Corolla (sulfer/rotten egg smell literally drove people out of their cars)
Matrix (lights coming on at night and killing batteries)
Prius (major safety recalls in first year)
4Runner (lots of first year probs)
Highlander (hesitation issues that still haven't been fixed)
Avalon (same here)
Rav4 (the prior model was plagued with squeaks and rattles that were never fixed; the new one has brake problems, odd noises from behind the driver and water leaking in to the passenger side with the slightest of rains)
'07 Camry has hesitation, shift flare, the snap ring issue, center console squeaking, window and A and B piller rattling.
Step forward 11 years, I buy a 1995 Dodge Ram Pickup. After 1 month large chunks of paint started falling of the truck. I had to have it repainted twice. Within 40K miles the transmission was replaced, the catalytic converter was toast, and a host of other problems occurred
How many ridiculously bad experiences does it take before one writes off a car company? In my case 1 too many!
My Honda's, Nissan, and Mazda cars have been very good to me.
John